2. It is recognized that the circumstances, such as the fact that property damage caused by the instant crime was not significant, and that the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime and reflects his mistake, are considered to have already been considered in the sentencing of the lower court.

In addition, the crime of this case was committed by deceiving the defendant to sell smartphones against the victim who became aware of in DKapets, and acquired 300,000 won by deceiving them, in light of the methods and contents of the crime, etc., the crime was considerably poor in light of the methods and contents of the crime, and the criminal records of criminal punishment of the defendant are many. In particular, the defendant committed the crime of this case at least 3 months after being released from prison, taking full account of the circumstances such as the equality in sentencing with the sentencing with the same and similar incidents, and other various sentencing conditions shown in the argument of this case, including the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., it is not recognized that the court below's punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.